Philosophy and Heresy

Much of the error of the Roman Bishops were from philosophy. Hippolytus wrote about the philosophers of his day and how their theories were being pushed by the people of Rome and her leaders.

Col 2:8  Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Many do not realize it but the theory of evolution came from Philosophers of Hippolytus' era. The same philosopher who declared the earth wasn't created but was born from eternal mass and motion also said man came from fish..

Anaximander, then, was the hearer of Thales. Anaximander was son of Praxiadas, and a native of Miletus. This man said that the originating principle of existing things is a certain constitution of the Infinite, out of which the heavens are generated, and the worlds therein; and that this principle is eternal and undecaying, and comprising all the worlds. ...

... And that animals are produced (in moisture57) by evaporation from the sun. And that man was, originally, similar to a different animal, that is, a fish.

It sounds similar to the science of our day. It could also be why Pope Francis mentioned us coming from fish, saying evolution does not contradict Genesis. Anaximander's theory the principle is undecaying may violate the rule of entropy where systems go from order to less order.

What is really concerning is that the council of Nicea used philosophy to settle the Nature of God. Philosophers had produced the idea God and Christ were one substance (Consubstantial). This was being taught in Rome by members of the presbytery before the council of Nicea.

One could argue the council of Nicea wasn't called until the philosophers had enough support, about 75 years after Calistus. Hyppolitus wrote about the origin and traced it to Noetus, who effected different presbyters.

Now, that Noetus affirms that the Son and Father are the same, no one is ignorant. But he makes his statement thus: “When indeed, then, the Father had not been born, He yet was justly styled Father; and when it pleased Him to undergo generation, having been begotten, He Himself became His own Son, not another’s.” For in this manner he thinks to establish the sovereignty of God, alleging that Father and Son, so called, are one and the same (substance), not one individual produced from a different one, but Himself from Himself; and that He is styled by name Father and Son, according to vicissitude of times.23 But that He is one who has appeared (amongst us), both having submitted to generation from a virgin, and as a man having held converse among men. And, on account of the birth that had taken place, He confessed Himself to those beholding Him a Son, no doubt; yet He made no secret to those who could comprehend Him of His being a Father. That this person suffered by being fastened to the tree, and that He commended His spirit unto Himself, having died to appearance, and not being (in reality) dead. And He raised Himself up the third day, after having been interred in a sepulchre, and

The interesting point is Hippolytus rebuked teachers and Popes in Rome (Calistus and Zepharinus) for following this framework. Catholics rejected Noetus and later Sebellius and parts of the theology of the philosophers, but accepted and used the idea Jesus and the Father were the same substance.

Anti-Nicene Fathers Vol. 5

The Nicene creed was based upon human philosophy that made its way into Rome and was later used at the council of Nicea.Hippolytus explained their reasoning of 250-254 AD in this manner.

. Callistus alleges that the Logos Himself is Son, and that Himself is Father; and that though denominated by a different title, yet that in reality He is one indivisible spirit. And he maintains that the Father is not one person and the Son another, but that they are one and the same; and that all things are full of the Divine Spirit, both those above and those below. And he affirms that the Spirit, which became incarnate in the virgin, is not different from the Father, but one and the same. And he adds, that this is what has been declared by the Saviour: “Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?” (Joh_14:11) For that which is seen, which is man, he considers to be the Son; whereas the Spirit, which was contained in the Son, to be the Father. “For,” says (Callistus), “I will not profess belief in two Gods, Father and Son, but in one. For the Father, who subsisted in the Son Himself, after He had taken unto Himself our flesh, raised it to the nature of Deity, by bringing it into union with Himself, and made it one; so that Father and Son must be styled one God, and that this Person being one, cannot be two.” And in this way Callistus contends that the Father suffered along with the Son; f

One point against the Catholic dogma is that it was not taught universally in all churches. If the teaching the Father and Jesus were the same  and both suffered was Apastolic, then it would be accepted in most of Christendom, at the time it was not as witnessed by Catholics themselves.

And in fact it cannot be denied that the Church of Rome must have held a Trinitarian doctrine not far from that taught by Callistus's elder contemporary Tertullian and by his much younger contemporary Novatian--a doctrine which was not so explicitly taught in the greater part of the East for a long period afterwards.

Catholic Encyclopedia

Callstus

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03183d.htm

Thus, the new formulation of the Trinity was local and not universal. If it were Apostolic it would have had wider appeal and definitionl. Some of the wording of Church councils were not Apostolic.

The idea that Jesus and the Father were one did not imply same person, but unity of nature, family, and work..

Joh 10:30  I and my Father are one.

Joh 10:31  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

Joh 10:32  Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

Joh 10:33  The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

Joh 10:34  Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

Joh 10:35  If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Joh 10:36  Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Joh 10:37  If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.

Joh 10:38  But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

In the Law anyone sent by God were recognized as Gods, thus possessing authority from God's throne, how much more the Son sent into the world. Jesus was however claiming to be God's son, which established a relationship greater than those called God's in the wilderness.

Jesus point was he was working in unison with his Father.

The Jewish claim of blaspheme was not that Jesus claimed he and the Father were the same person, but that his authority reflected sonship, implying same nature. In a physical sense it might have implied same substance only if the Father was fleshly.

"that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."

They denied Christ's divinity, seeing him as a man only, denying he came forth of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus elevated himself to the status of God, in position and nature.

Jesus' usage of the word one is unity. Jesus shows that union of spirit is possible, two can become one as with a husband and wife.

1Co 6:17  But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Jesus was not the same individual as The father, they were individual but joined, individual but not independent.

They were one as a united one.

Deu 6:4  Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

The word used by Moses is "united one"

H259

אֶחָד

'echâd

ekh-awd'

A numeral from H258; properly united, that is, one; or (as an ordinal) first: - a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any (-thing), apiece, a certain [dai-] ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.

Total KJV occurrences: 968

The idea of a united Godhead was taught to Israel.

Jesus used the same concept earlier.

Joh 10:16  AndG2532 otherG243 sheepG4263 I have,G2192 whichG3739 areG2076 notG3756 ofG1537 thisG5026 fold:G833 them alsoG2548 IG3165 mustG1163 bring,G71 andG2532 they shall hearG191 myG3450 voice;G5456 andG2532 there shall beG1096 oneG3391 fold,G4167 and oneG1520 shepherd.G4166

A group combined into one.

It can be argued the word one in John 10:16 and John 10:30 are different words, but both are used in a sense of unity, Paul using both for unity in the same sentence. 

1Co 6:16  What?G2228 knowG1492 ye notG3756 thatG3754 he which is joinedG2853 to an harlotG4204 isG2076 oneG1520 body?G4983 forG1063 two,G1417 saithG5346 he, shall beG2071 one(G3391) flesh.G4561

There is nothing in John 10:30 saying Jesus and the Father are the same person. In this we agree with Catholics. It is too bad they did accept some points of the philosophers.